Reported risk evidence comparison

Toys: detachable parts, accessible edges — reported risk evidence

The acquired cohort contains 76 official alert references published from 2006-01-22 to 2026-09-11. This page compares 8 selected, distinct product descriptions, including activity toy set, doll's house, soft toy with key ring. The other 68 records still contribute to the cohort counts but are not displayed: descriptions may repeat, lack the display inputs, or fall outside the eight-description display limit. The recorded risks raise separate evidence questions about detachable parts, accessible edges. Compare the product features and dated findings below before scoping an investigation. These historical observations do not determine your product’s compliance or a market failure rate.

Evidence retrieved 2026-10-07. Source versions and topic-specific limits are listed below.

Dated official observations

Compare the product features and reported failure mechanism

The source wording below describes the reported case at that time. Read each complete report before using it in an investigation.

Activity toy set · SR/02423/26

Report published 2026-09-11 · notifying country France · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Activity toy set consisting of a box in the shape of a hen, with a wooden mallet and three wooden balls (yellow, red, blue-green). All batches are affected. [1]
Reported risk explanation: The product has small parts (fragments of wood) that may easily detach. Small children may put them in the mouth and choke. Additionally, the sharp points on the fragments of wood could lead to injuries. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with European standard EN 71-1. [1]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: UnknownType of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 20/05/2026 [1]

Read the official alert ↗

Doll's house · SR/01792/26

Report published 2026-06-19 · notifying country Ireland · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Tabletop dolls house with string carry handle, hinged opening roof and front panel to allow for play, with several additional characters with which to play with. [2]
Reported risk explanation: The front roof screws and hinges can easily detach. The detached screws have sharp points. Due to their small size, small children could put them in the mouth and choke and could suffer cuts. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive. [2]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 18/05/2026Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 30/04/2026 [2]

Read the official alert ↗

Soft toy with key ring · SR/00674/26

Report published 2026-03-06 · notifying country United Kingdom in respect of Northern Ireland · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Soft toy with a keyring and blue plastic face, hands and feet. [3]
Reported risk explanation: The toy contains a small part (keyring) that can easily detach. A small child may put it in the mouth and choke. Moreover, in case of removal of the keyring, a sharp metal point becomes accessible, which may cause injuries to the user. This product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive. [3]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): DistributorCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 03/09/2025 [3]

Read the official alert ↗

Soft toy · A12/01909/24

Report published 2024-07-19 · notifying country Lithuania · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: White and brown dog soft toy with accessories: a plastic bow with a pink ribbon, grey glasses, and a plastic blue bag with pink handles. [4]
Reported risk explanation: The toy can easily break, resulting in small parts (parts of the glasses). A small child may put them in the mouth and choke. Moreover, the glasses have sharp edges, which may cause cuts or injuries to a child. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with the European standard EN 71-1. [4]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: RetailerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: Unknown [4]

Read the official alert ↗

Toy rattle · A12/01665/24

Report published 2024-06-28 · notifying country France · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Toy rattle with bells attached to a semi-circular support. Product sold online. [5]
Reported risk explanation: The toy has small parts (metal bells), that can easily detach. A child can put them in their mouth and choke. The bells in the toy present sharp edges, which can cause cuts or injuries to a child. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with the European standard EN 71-1. [5]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): OtherCategory of measure(s): Removal of this product listing by the online marketplaceDate of entry into force: 26/02/2024Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): ManufacturerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: Unknown [5]

Read the official alert ↗

Wooden toy with key ring · A12/00895/23

Report published 2023-04-28 · notifying country France · reported origin Germany

Reported product description: Wooden toy with a key ring. Size approximately of 6 x 4 x 2 cm. The product is also sold online. [6]
Reported risk explanation: Small parts (fragments of wood from the limbs) can easily detach. A child may put them in the mouth and choke. If the metal ring is opened, it makes a pointed end (sharp point) which can cause injury. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with the European standard EN 71-1. [6]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Recall of the product from end usersDate of entry into force: 13/02/2023Type of economic operator taking notified measure(s): RetailerCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 15/11/2022 [6]

Read the official alert ↗

Toy gun set · A12/00265/23

Report published 2023-02-17 · notifying country Poland · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: Plastic toy gun set consisting of black/red rifle and gun with 3 projectiles each, a pair of green protective glasses, a shield and a police badge. All projectiles are made of rigid plastic with suction cups. [7]
Reported risk explanation: The suction cups of the projectiles can be easily detached. A child can put them in the mouth and choke. Moreover, the protective glasses break easily, generating sharp edges which may cause cuts or eye injuries. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with the European standard EN 71-1. [7]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 29/12/2022Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Warning consumers of the risksDate of entry into force: 29/12/2022 [7]

Read the official alert ↗

Plastic toy gun · A12/01859/22

Report published 2022-12-23 · notifying country Poland · reported origin People's Republic of China

Reported product description: A set consisting of a pistol (which is a projectile toy with stored energy), 15 plastic balls and 2 foam projectiles with suction cups. [8]
Reported risk explanation: The size of foam projectiles is inadequate. A child playing with the toy may put the projectile in the mouth and choke. Moreover the ball-shaped bullets have sharp parts which can cause cuts during impact. The product does not comply with the requirements of the Toy Safety Directive nor with the European standard EN 71-1. [8]
Reported measures, verbatim: Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Withdrawal of the product from the marketDate of entry into force: 10/11/2022Type of economic operator to whom the measure(s) were ordered: ImporterCategory of measure(s): Warning consumers of the risksDate of entry into force: 10/11/2022 [8]

Read the official alert ↗

What this acquired cohort contains

76 distinct official alert references, published between 2006-01-22 and 2026-09-11. Counts describe the acquired reports, with no market denominator.

Report year	Recorded alerts
2005	1
2006	1
2007	3
2008	11
2009	7
2010	3
2011	4
2012	4
2013	11
2014	4
2015	6
2016	6
2017	1
2018	3
2019	1
2021	1
2022	2
2023	2
2024	2
2026	3

Recorded risk labels within this evidence task

Label combinations are source facts within one comparison; they do not create separate guides with identical preparation tasks.

Chemical, Choking, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Choking: 15 recorded references
Choking, Cuts: 14 recorded references
Choking, Cuts, Damage to sight: 1 recorded references
Choking, Cuts, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Choking, Damage to sight, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Choking, Injuries: 39 recorded references
Choking, Injuries, Suffocation: 1 recorded references
Cuts, Injuries: 1 recorded references
Cuts, Suffocation: 1 recorded references
Injuries, Suffocation: 1 recorded references

Source selection, exclusions and calculation method

Filter the acquired, completely parsed English weekly XML releases. Deduplicate official alert references. Group by product category and the complete set of conditional evidence-question topics supported by actual risk text. Risk-label combinations remain recorded cohort facets and do not create buyer intents. Brand, product name, model, origin, notifying country, measurement-only changes and different wording of the same questions do not create intents. Unrecognized mechanisms stay internal for enrichment. Count report years and notifying countries deterministically. Display at most eight newest descriptions with at least 40 characters after whitespace normalization, nonempty reported measures and distinct casefolded descriptions; break date ties by official identifier. All cohort records count even if their description is shorter or not displayed. This is not a representative sample. Counts concern this acquired corpus only.

One acquired version per official public alert reference. Display at most eight newest distinct product descriptions whose normalized whitespace-collapsed text contains at least 40 characters and has nonempty reported measures; ties sort by official identifier. The complete cohort includes shorter descriptions. This is an explicit display selection, not a representative sample.

8 distinct descriptions displayed; 68 cohort records not displayed. Missing fields: {'measures': 11}.

These are selected, dated enforcement observations in the acquired weekly reports, not a random market sample, market-wide failure rate, proof of current product status, or a determination about your product. Notification country is not a complete sales-market or jurisdiction-coverage field. A quoted legal/standard reference is the report’s statement, not independently verified current law or a mandatory test panel.

Calculation safety-gate-evidence-comparison-10; units recorded alerts; no incidence denominator.

Turn the reported failure mechanism into a scoped investigation

Use this checklist to gather your business or product details before speaking with a specialist. The items below explain what to record and suggest useful supporting documents. You can add your own answers in the editable project brief.

Accessible and detachable parts — what evidence do we have?
Document the intended users/age, accessible parts, attachment/retention design and relevant use or misuse conditions. Compare the source’s actual detachment or choking explanation with your product; agree justified methods and current criteria separately.
Useful evidence: Age/use rationale, part/attachment drawings, material and assembly data, existing retention/accessibility evidence.
Reported context: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]
Accessible edges and points — what evidence do we have?
Compare the particular accessible edge or point, material, geometry and use conditions with the reported cutting mechanism. Ask a specialist to justify the applicable assessment and criteria for your actual product and users.
Useful evidence: Dimensioned edge/point drawings, material and finish specifications, use/accessibility context and relevant existing evaluation.
Reported context: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]
Can we trace the affected component, formula or design revision across our supplied products?
Compare the reported descriptions with your own identifiers and change records. Treat missing or “Unknown” source fields as unresolved; they do not establish that no action was needed.
Useful evidence: Product identifiers, revision history, supplier/batch traceability and market/operator records.
Who would own an evidence review and any resulting corrective-action decision?
Read the reported measures as historical observations. Establish your own operator roles, sector-specific rules, decision owner and communication responsibilities before adopting another case’s response.
Useful evidence: Supply-chain responsibility map, applicable-law review, investigation scope and documented decision/communication workflow.

Work packages and dependencies

Conditional: Product-risk evidence and operator-role review — Compare the recorded product features and failure mechanism with your product. Confirm the applicable product regime, deciding evidence, operator responsibilities and justified next steps. This does not assume that GPSR or a representative appointment applies to every alert category.

Questions for providers

Which specific product features and reported risk mechanism make these cases relevant or irrelevant to our product?
What current legal, standards or scientific sources support your proposed investigation criteria, and what cannot be concluded from these dated alerts?
Which existing evidence can answer the risk question, what additional work is justified, and who owns any resulting corrective-action decision?

Sources and data dates

Read the official document in context. The audit details identify the precise locators and preserved versions used for this page.